thedrifter
07-09-03, 06:01 AM
July 08, 2003
Senate panel approves funding measure; battle with House looms
By Rick Maze
Times staff writer
A Senate subcommittee gave quick approval Tuesday to a $369.2 billion defense funding bill for 2004 that sets up a fight with the House over funding for missile defense, the building of submarines and the delivery of Stryker brigade tanks and personnel carriers to reserve instead of active units.
“This is a big bill, a very big bill, and there are so many things we will have to decide,” said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its defense subcommittee.
The full Senate committee is expected to take up the bill on Wednesday. The House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill June 26, and the bill was being debated Tuesday on the House floor.
The House and Senate versions share one striking similarity: both use a budgetary gimmick to replace about $3 billion of 2004 funds that they diverted, with White House approval, to domestic programs. The $3 billion for the military in 2004 is replaced by rescinding money already approved for 2003, a ploy that is possible only because the Pentagon has not yet spent all of its wartime supplemental money that Congress approved in April.
Stevens did not provide details on exactly where the rescissions were made, but said the subcommittee used slightly different sources than the House version of the bill, making that a matter for negotiation later.
Also important, he said, is to get a better sense of the costs of ongoing military operations in Iraq because the House used money for Operation Iraqi Freedom as a source for $2 billion of the $3 billion in diverted funds.
One of the biggest differences between the House and Senate bills is over equipping the Army’s Stryker Brigade Combat Teams, a key transformation initiative.
The House bill adds $35 million to the Army’s $955 million request for long-lead funds for the fifth and sixth Styker brigades.
The Senate, however, adds more than $60 million but restricts the money to National Guard forces. This is part of an overall $700 million increase in funding for National Guard and reserve equipment, Stevens said.
There are several differences over shipbuilding. The biggest involves multi-year contracting for the Virginia-class attack submarine.
The House Appropriations Committee strongly opposed multi-year contracts and rejected a Navy request to enter into a contract next year for the purchase of seven ships. The fact that the lead ship of the class has not been delivered is a chief reason for the committee’s action.
Stevens said the Senate subcommittee shares concerns about the potential cost, which now hovers around $2.6 billion per sub, but addresses the issue by cutting two submarines off the long-term contract.
Another difference is that the Senate bill would spend $77 million more than the administration requested for missile defense programs, with the extra funds going to the ground-based interceptor program favored by Stevens.
Sempers,
Roger
:marine:
Senate panel approves funding measure; battle with House looms
By Rick Maze
Times staff writer
A Senate subcommittee gave quick approval Tuesday to a $369.2 billion defense funding bill for 2004 that sets up a fight with the House over funding for missile defense, the building of submarines and the delivery of Stryker brigade tanks and personnel carriers to reserve instead of active units.
“This is a big bill, a very big bill, and there are so many things we will have to decide,” said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its defense subcommittee.
The full Senate committee is expected to take up the bill on Wednesday. The House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill June 26, and the bill was being debated Tuesday on the House floor.
The House and Senate versions share one striking similarity: both use a budgetary gimmick to replace about $3 billion of 2004 funds that they diverted, with White House approval, to domestic programs. The $3 billion for the military in 2004 is replaced by rescinding money already approved for 2003, a ploy that is possible only because the Pentagon has not yet spent all of its wartime supplemental money that Congress approved in April.
Stevens did not provide details on exactly where the rescissions were made, but said the subcommittee used slightly different sources than the House version of the bill, making that a matter for negotiation later.
Also important, he said, is to get a better sense of the costs of ongoing military operations in Iraq because the House used money for Operation Iraqi Freedom as a source for $2 billion of the $3 billion in diverted funds.
One of the biggest differences between the House and Senate bills is over equipping the Army’s Stryker Brigade Combat Teams, a key transformation initiative.
The House bill adds $35 million to the Army’s $955 million request for long-lead funds for the fifth and sixth Styker brigades.
The Senate, however, adds more than $60 million but restricts the money to National Guard forces. This is part of an overall $700 million increase in funding for National Guard and reserve equipment, Stevens said.
There are several differences over shipbuilding. The biggest involves multi-year contracting for the Virginia-class attack submarine.
The House Appropriations Committee strongly opposed multi-year contracts and rejected a Navy request to enter into a contract next year for the purchase of seven ships. The fact that the lead ship of the class has not been delivered is a chief reason for the committee’s action.
Stevens said the Senate subcommittee shares concerns about the potential cost, which now hovers around $2.6 billion per sub, but addresses the issue by cutting two submarines off the long-term contract.
Another difference is that the Senate bill would spend $77 million more than the administration requested for missile defense programs, with the extra funds going to the ground-based interceptor program favored by Stevens.
Sempers,
Roger
:marine: